Szőcs, Péter Levente (szerk.): Satu Mare. Studii şi comunicări. Seria arheologie 22/1. (2005)

Zsolt Molnár: Habitatul culturii Otomani din Câmpia Careiului şi valea Eriului

Habitatul culturii Otomani din Câmpia Caretului şi valea Briului

53. Bortită (Portelek)- “Vis-a-vis de cimitir” (A temetővel szemben), -jud. Satu Mare.

54. Roşiori (Biharfóldvár)- “Cetatea de pământ” (Földvár), -jud. Bihor.

55. Sanislău (S^anisflo)- “La hârburi” (Cserepes), -jud. Satu Marc.

56. Sanislău (Stşanisflo)- “Lângă Heleşteu” (A halastó mellett) -jud. Satu Marc.

57. Săcuieni (Sekélyhíd)- “Cetatea Boului” (Ökörvár), -jud. Bihor.

58. Sălacea (Scşalad)- “Dealul Vida” (Vida domb), -jud. Bihor.

59. Sănicolaul de Munte (Hegykö%s%entmiklós)- “Dealul Bătrânilor” (Öregdomb), -jud. Bihor.

60. Şilindru (Erselénd-“Füzék”, -jud. Bihor.

61. Şimian (Ersemjén)- “Locul grădinilor” (Kerthelyek), -jud. Bihor.

62. Tarcea (Értarcsa)- “Dealul mare” (Nagydomb), -jud. Bihor.

63. Tarcea (Értarcsa)- “Dealul de mijloc” (Középhegy), -jud. Bihor.

64. Tarcea (Értarcsa)- “Hóimul marc” (Nagyhalom), -jud. Bihor.

65. Terebeşti (Kras^naterebes), -jud. Satu Mare.

66. Tiream (Megterem)- “Hóimul cânepii” (Kendereshalom), -jud. Satu Mare.

67. Unimăt (Újnémet)- “Dalboci” (Dalbócs), -jud. Satu Mare.

68. IJrflceni (Csanálos)- “Vatta satului” (A falu területen), -jud Satu Mare.

69. Urflceni (Csanálos)-“Fir\m\\A Careiului” (A nagykárolyi út mentén), -jud. Satu Mare.

70. Halea lui Mihai (Érmihályfa/vá)-“Groapa cu lut” (Sárgaföldcs gödör), -jud. Bihor.

71. Valea lui Mihai (Érmihályfalvd)-“Gitoapa cu lut” (Sárgaföldes gödör), -jud. Bihor.

72. Valea lui Mihai (Érmihályfalva)- -“Dienes”, -jud. Bihor.

73. Valea lui Mihai (.Érmihályfalva)-“La păşune” (Legelő), -jud. Bihor.

74. Valea lui Mihai (É.rmihályfalvá)-“Fa izvoare” (Forrás), -jud. Bihor.

75. Valea lui Mihai (Érmihályfalva)-') a vii” (Szőlők), -jud. Bihor.

76. Văşad (Vasad), -jud. Bihor.

77. Văşad (Vasad)-“F)taha\ viilor” (Szőlők), -jud. Bihor.

78. Văşad (Vasad)- “Cartierul ţiganilor” (Cigánynegyed), -jud. Bihor.

79. Vesşendiu (Vetflnd)- “Broscari” (Békás), -jud. Satu Mare.

80. Voivofl (Erkenéf) -jud. Bihor.

The Habitat of the Otomani Culture in the Cărei Plain and the Emu Valley

(Abstract)

During the arca 500 years of the Middle Bronze Age the Carpathian-Basin resembles a mosaic from the cultural point of view. Despite the fact that every community developed a spedfic material culture in this chronological sequence we still may talk on a so-called „tells’ society” based on the social and economic macro features. This type of habitat is spedfic for the studied region and for the great Hungarian Plain, too. During the Middle Bronze Age in these areas had been created a "cultural complex" characterised by homogeneity of pottery and metallurgy of bronze. The aim of this study is to present a much accurate image on the Middle Bronze Age landscape from the Carei Plain and the valley of the Eriu River. The starting point was the exhaustive recording of the Otomani settlements (mapping, visiting and photographing each site, analysing archeological evidence). 80 settlements have been identified in the researched area. The list of sites is far from being complete, but it still does reflect the actual state of the research. In the current paper, I present a brief review of the Romanian scholars’ opinions regarding the inhabited area of the Otomani communities.

The settlement system from the Carei Plain and the Valley of Eriu River is framed on its natural landscape of the analysed region and the background of the Middle Bronze Age environment. Although the research on vestiges of the Otomani communities is faring various difficulties we still can draw some conclusions such as:

— within the Carei Plain and Valley of the Eriu River the makers of the Middle Bronse Age civilisation as well as the founders of the tells were the bearers of the Otomani Culture;

— in the analysed area the “tell society” is made of hierarchical communities with a sedentary life and a rural economy. The settlements system is structured on sites of various sises and well organised from the social point of view. The tells were ‘political" and economical centers. The residential area (the tells) of the local chieftains can be considered centers for the redistribution of goods to the periphery spnes.

— in the 2nd period of the Otomani Culture, one can observed the numerical increase of settlements within the Carei Plain as well as in the Valley of Emu River. In the 3nl period of this culture part of the settlements where abandoned by the Otomani communities. This abandonment was probably due to the climatic and environmental changes, as well as economic reasons. I hope that the analysis and the few conclusions presented here will provide a starting-pointfor the future research on this matter.

53